On Wed, 5 Dec 2007, Matthias Pigulla wrote:
> > > Is it possible to always perform (unconditionally compile in) the
> > > necessary housekeeping tasks but stick with the current GC, so that
> > > cycle-detection only happens when the user calls a
> > > gc_go_find_cycles()
> > > function? Would tha
> > Is it possible to always perform (unconditionally compile in) the
> > necessary housekeeping tasks but stick with the current GC, so that
> > cycle-detection only happens when the user calls a
> > gc_go_find_cycles()
> > function? Would that significantly improve the above numbers?
>
> Yes, th
On Wed, 5 Dec 2007, Matthias Pigulla wrote:
> > To summarize the patch lead to approx. 5% slowdown and 3% memory
> > overhead for typical applications (as always, you mileage may vary
> > depending on your system's architecture and OS although my guesstimate
> > is that you will see even worse res
> To summarize the patch lead to approx. 5% slowdown and 3% memory
> overhead for typical applications (as always, you mileage may vary
> depending on your system's architecture and OS although my guesstimate
> is that you will see even worse results in a 64bit environment).
Does that slowdown res
